DETAILED ACTION
The communication dated 7/28/2026 has been entered and fully considered.
Claims 1, 10 and 13 have been amended. Claim 6 has been cancelled. Claims 1-5 and 7-13 are pending.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s amendments have overcome the claim objections and the § 112(b) rejections set forth in the office action of 3/13/2026. Therefore, the claim objections and the §112(b) rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 7/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that DEARMAN does not teach tools for heating and there is no space in the configured of figure 1 for accommodating such a tool for heating.
The Examiner agrees that DEARMAN does not teach a tool for heating. However, CHOI teaches a heating tool. Furthermore, it is well settled that the intended use of a claimed apparatus is not germane to the issue of the patentability of the claimed structure. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the claimed use then it meets the claim. See In re Casey, 152 USPQ 235, 238 (CCPA 1967); In re Otto, 136 USPQ 459 (CCPA 1963). (“The manner or method in which a machine is to be utilized is not germane to the issue of patentability of the machine itself, In re Casey 152 USPQ 235.”).
The Examiner would like to note that the Applicant also states CHOI discloses a similar configuration with the use of a melting unit 50 coming in contact with the wall from the inside of the tank and the extension element extends along a longitudinal axis X [see figure 5].
The Applicant argues that DEARMAN neither discloses nor suggests a surface of the rotatable follower “configured to extend in alignment with the tool for heating by direct contact with respect to the longitudinal axis”. It also fails to teach clamping the wall between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower, as not recited in Claims 1 and 10. Further, none of the other cited art, CHOI, TRUDE, WEBER teach clamping.
The Examiner would like to note that the Applicant also states CHOI discloses a similar configuration with the use of a melting unit 50 coming in contact with the wall from the inside of the tank and the extension element extends along a longitudinal axis X [see figure 5].
The Applicant argues that CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN, WEBER, SCHEINBERGER and BAEK do not teach or render obvious that in the working position, the planar surface of the rotatable follower is oriented in a second position with respect to the longitudinal axis X, different from the first position, is in direct contact with a planar surface of an inner surface of the wall of the motor vehicle tank to bear flatly against the inner surface of the wall through which the extension element passes, and is configured to extend in alignment with the tool for heating by direct contact with respect to the longitudinal axis so that the wall is clamped between the tool for the heating and the planar surface of the rotatable follower, as recited in claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The recitation in the claims “so that the wall is clamped between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower” is merely an intended use. Applicants attention is drawn to MPEP 2111.02 which states that intended use statements must be evaluated to determine whether the intended use results in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. Only if such structural difference exists, does the recitation serve to limit the claim. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
It is the examiner's position that the intended use recited in the present claims does not result in a structural difference between the presently claimed invention and the prior art and further that the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use. Given that CHOI and DEARMAN discloses a rotatable follower and tool as presently claimed, it is clear that the rotatable follower and tool of CHOI and DEARMAN would be capable of performing the intended use, i.e. “so that the wall is clamped between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower”, presently claimed as required in the above cited portion of the MPEP, and thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed invention. The Examiner would like to note that limitations in regards to positioning of articles or the way the article is being worked upon is not further limiting for apparatus claims and recommends further defining the structure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHOI et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2019/0016062), hereinafter CHOI, in view of Trude et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2012/0266565), hereinafter TRUDE, Dearman (U.S. 4,338,712), hereinafter DEARMAN, Weber et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2012/0205049), hereinafter WEBER, and/or in the alternative, Baek et al. (KR 2020-0070469 A), hereinafter BAEK.
Regarding claim 1, CHOI teaches: An assembly for heating by direct contact for a machine for plastic welding of a component to an opening in a wall of a motor vehicle tank (CHOI teaches an assembly for heating to weld a component to a wall of a vehicle tank [Figs. 3-5; Abstract].), the assembly comprising: a tool for heating by direct contact for a machine for plastic welding of a component to an opening in a wall of a motor vehicle tank (a tool for heating (50) in a tank (1a) [0027; 0045]); and a stop system configured to engage with the tool for heating by direct contact (CHOI teaches a stop system (Fig. 2) engaged with a tool for heating (50) in a tank (1a) [0027; 0045]), the system comprising a deployable member which comprises: an extension element of longitudinal axis X . . . (CHOI teaches a deployable member (31) of a longitudinal axis X [Fig. 2; 0028]), at least one follower coupled to the extension element for converting a translational movement along the longitudinal axis X of the at least one follower with respect to the extension element into a straight or quasi- straight movement of at least one point of the at least one follower in a direction that is not parallel to the longitudinal axis X (CHOI shows the follower (40) is moved in a longitudinal axis when the shaft moves (31) and moves at a point in a direction that is not parallel to the longitudinal axis [Figs. 3-5]), wherein the deployable member of the at least one rotatable follower configured to move from a rest position in which the stop system is configured to pass freely through an opening in a wall of a motor vehicle tank to a working position (CHOI teaches the deployable member (31 and 40) move from a rest position outside the tank and then moves into the tank and the follower (40) bears against the inner surface of the wall through the opening of the tank [Figs. 3-5; 0028; 0034; 0039]. CHOI also shows the tool goes into the tank and out of the tank along the longitudinal axis [Figs. 1-9].), . . . , and wherein the inner surface is contiguous with the opening (CHOI teaches the inner surface is contiguous with the opening [Figs. 3-5]).
CHOI does not explicitly teach: from the group consisting of a straight cam, a rack, a worm screw, and an inflatable balloon; . . . ; wherein in the rest position, a planar surface of the rotatable follower is oriented in a first position with respect to the longitudinal axis X, wherein in the working position, the planar surface of the rotatable follower is oriented in a second position with respect to the longitudinal axis X, different from the first position, is in direct contact with a planar surface of an inner surface of the wall of the motor vehicle tank to bear flatly against the inner surface of the wall through which the extension element passes, and is configured to extend in alignment with the tool for heating by direct contact with respect to the longitudinal axis.
CHOI is silent as to the extension part being comprised from the group consisting of a straight cam, a rack, a worm screw, and an inflatable balloon. In the same field of endeavor, plastic, TRUDE teaches an extendable member (426) being a cam [0084]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify CHOI, by having a cam extendable member, as suggested by TRUDE, in order to push pieces inward at a specific point in the cycle [0079].
If the Applicant remains unconvinced that CHOI and TRUDE teach: at least one follower coupled to the extension element for converting a translational movement along the longitudinal axis X of the at least one follower with respect to the extension element into a straight or quasi- straight movement of at least one point of the at least one follower in a direction that is not parallel to the longitudinal axis X, and wherein in the rest position, a planar surface of the rotatable follower is oriented in a first position with respect to the longitudinal axis X, wherein in the working position, the planar surface of the rotatable follower is oriented in a second position with respect to the longitudinal axis X, different from the first position. In the alternative, in the same field of endeavor, welding, DEARMAN teaches: at least one follower coupled to the extension element (DEARMAN teaches at least one follower (finger (38)) coupled to the rod (30) [Fig. 1; Col. 2, lines 63 – Col. 3, lines 3-10]) for converting a translational movement along the longitudinal axis X of the at least one follower with respect to the extension element into a straight or quasi- straight movement of at least one point of the at least one follower in a direction that is not parallel to the longitudinal axis X (DEARMAN shows the follower (38) is moved in a translational movement along the longitudinal axis in a quasi-straight movement of at least one point of at least one follower in a direction that is not parallel to the longitudinal direction [Figs. 1, 2 and 4]), wherein the deployable member of the at least one rotatable follower configured to move from a rest position in which the stop system is configured to pass freely through an opening in a wall of a motor vehicle tank (DEARMAN teaches the body (1) with at least one follower (38) is capable of moving from a rest position in the which the tube (27) may be lowered into the pipe (53) via the opening (55), with the fingers (38) retraced, until the free ends of the fingers are at a level below that of the opening (55) [Col. 4, lines 5-8; Fig. 4]) to a working position (DEARMAN teaches the rod (30) then may be moved downwardly to effect swinging of the retainer arms (38) to their projected positions, following which the tube (277) again may be raised so as to enable the free ends of the retainer fingers to bear against the inside surface of the pipe wall (54) [Col. 4, lines 9-13; Fig. 1]), wherein in the rest position, a planar surface of the rotatable follower is oriented in a first position with respect to the longitudinal axis X (DEARMAN shows a planar surface of the rotatable followers (38) are oriented in a first position with respect to the longitudinal axis X when it is passing the opening [Fig. 1]), wherein in the working position, the planar surface of the rotatable follower is oriented in a second position with respect to the longitudinal axis X, different from the first position (DEARMAN shows the planar surface of the rotatable follower is oriented in a second position with respect to the longitudinal axis, different from the first position [Fig. 2]), . . . , and is configured to extend in alignment with the tool for heating by direct contact with respect to the longitudinal axis so that the wall is clamped between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower (DEARMAN shows the tool extends in the longitudinal axis [Fig. 1].), and wherein the inner surface is contiguous with the opening (DEARMAN shows the inner surface (54) is contiguous with the opening (55) [Fig. 1]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify CHOI and TRUDE, by having at least one follower to move int a translational movement in a quasi-straight movement, as suggested by DEARMAN, in order to enable substantially universal adjustment of a fitting relative to the base member [Col. 1, lines 60-64].
CHOI, TRUDE and DEARMAN do not explicitly teach: a working position that is in direct contact with a planar surface of an inner surface of the wall of the motor vehicle tank to bear flatly against the inner surface of the wall through which the extension element passes. In the same field of endeavor, tanks, WEBER teaches a holding assembly (88, which Examiner is interpreting as a follower) moves between a resting position and a working position along a longitudinal X axis [Figs. 4-10; 0043; 0045]. WEBER teaches the holding assembly bears its planar surface flatly against the inner surface of the tank (20) [Figs. 9-10; 0043]. Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify DEARMAN and TRUDE, by having the holding assembly’s planar surface bear flatly to the inner surface of a tank, as suggested by WEBER, in order to provide a welding system for use in securing a selected component to a contact surface internally disposed within the interior of a hollow workpiece [0006].
CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN and WEBER do not explicitly teach welding on the outer surface of the wall of the tank. In the same field of endeavor, welding, BAEK teaches a heat tool (50) directly in contact with the outer surface of the tank (2a) that is contiguous with the opening [Fig. 4; 0052]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN and WEBER, by having the heat tool contact the outer wall of the tank, as suggested by BAEK, in order to fuse a component (1) to the surface of the tank as well as inside the tank [0056-0057].
Furthermore, the recitation in the claims “so that the wall is clamped between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower” is merely an intended use. Applicants attention is drawn to MPEP 2111.02 which states that intended use statements must be evaluated to determine whether the intended use results in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. Only if such structural difference exists, does the recitation serve to limit the claim. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. It is the examiner's position that the intended use recited in the present claims does not result in a structural difference between the presently claimed invention and the prior art and further that the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use. Given that CHOI, DEARMAN and BAEK discloses a rotatable follower and tool as presently claimed, it is clear that the rotatable follower and tool of CHOI, DEARMAN and BAEK would be capable of performing the intended use, i.e. “so that the wall is clamped between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower”, presently claimed as required in the above cited portion of the MPEP, and thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 3, CHOI teaches: wherein the extension element is a straight cam, a second peripheral surface of said at least one follower is configured to bear against the inner surface of the wall of the tank through which the straight cam passes in the working position (CHOI teaches the follower (40) is against the inner surface of the tank through the hole that the cam (31) pushes through [Fig. 7]).
Regarding claim 4, CHOI teaches: wherein the extension element is a straight cam (CHOI teaches an extension element (31)), said at least one follower comprises a rotating shaft of axis Y mounted in a cavity in a cylindrical support of the longitudinal axis (CHOI teaches a rotating shaft (32) in the axis Y supported by the support (20) that moves in the longitudinal axis X [Fig. 4; 0028]), the cylindrical support being capable of moving axially along the longitudinal axis X relative to the straight cam in order to convert the translation movement along the longitudinal axis of X of said at least one follower into the straight of quasi-straight movement of at least one point of said at least one follower (CHOI teaches the straight rod (31) is moved along the longitudinal axis X the moves the follower (40) [0028; Figs. 3-5]).
Regarding claim 5, CHOI teaches: wherein the deployable member comprises ‘n’ followers, where n is an increasing function of the size of the opening (CHOI teaches one follower (40), which meets the claimed limitation [0032].).
Regarding claim 7, CHOI teaches: wherein the tool for heating by direct contact comprises a melt overflow limiter (CHOI teaches heat insulating material (55) is provided on the heating tools (51, 52) and prevent overheating and thus prevent overflow [0048]. The Examiner is interpreting a melt overflow limiter to be anything that can prevent overflow as there is no example of a melt overflow limiter in the specification.).
Regarding claim 8, CHOI teaches: wherein the melt overflow limiter is secured to the tool for heating by direct contact (CHOI teaches heat insulating material (55) is provided on the heating tools (51, 52) and prevent overheating and thus prevent overflow [0048].).
Regarding claim 9, CHOI and TRUDE teach: A machine for plastic welding of a component to an opening in a wall of a motor vehicle tank (CHOI teaches welding a component to a tank [Abstract]), the machine comprising a heating assembly according to claim 6 and a tool for attaching a component by plastic welding (CHOI teaches a tool for attaching a component by plastic welding [Figs. 4-7; Abstract]).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHOI et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2019/0016062), hereinafter CHOI, Trude et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2012/0266565), hereinafter TRUDE, Dearman (U.S. 4,338,712), hereinafter DEARMAN, and Weber et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2012/0205049), hereinafter WEBER, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Scheinberger (FR 2925627 A1), hereinafter SCHEINBERGER.
Regarding claim 2, CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN and WEBER teach all of the claimed limitations as stated above, but are silent as to: wherein, the extension element is a straight cam, a coupling of said at least one follower to the straight cam is achieved by direct contact between a first peripheral surface of said at least one follower and a planar coupling surface of the straight cam, which is inclined at a non-zero angle A relative to the direction of the longitudinal axis X of the straight cam, such that the first peripheral surface of said at least one follower is made to follow the planar coupling surface of the straight cam, causing a translational movement along the longitudinal axis X of said at least one follower combined with a rotational movement of said at least one follower about an axis of rotation Y perpendicular to the longitudinal axis X when said at least one follower goes from the rest position to the working position. In the same field of endeavor, stop systems, SCHEINBERGER teaches a pin (9, 109) that Examiner is interpreting as cam. SCHEINBERGER teaches two support rings (19) that the Examiner is interpreting as followers. SCHEINBERGER teaches that the followers are on the peripheral surface of the followers and a planar coupling surface of the cam (9) and are inclined at a non-zero relative to the x axis [Figs. 1-3; pg. 9]. SCHEINBERGER teaches the followers would cause a translational movement along an x axis when moving the cam (9) [Figs. 2-3; pg. 9]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN and WEBER, by having the followers on the cam being on a first peripheral surface and move in an inclined position, as suggested by SCHEINBERGER, in order to clamp a part [pg. 1].
Claim(s) 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHOI et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2019/0016062), hereinafter CHOI, et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2012/0266565), hereinafter TRUDE, Dearman (U.S. 4,338,712), hereinafter DEARMAN, and Weber et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2012/0205049), hereinafter WEBER, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Baek et al. (KR 2020-0070469 A), hereinafter BAEK.
Regarding claim 10, CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN and WEBER teach: An engagement method for the engagement of a stop system as according to claim 1 (CHOI, TRUDE and DEARMAN teach a stop system as shown above for claim 1) with a tool for heating by direct contact for a machine for plastic welding of a component to an opening in a wall of a motor vehicle tank (CHOI teaches heating tool (50) for welding a component to a wall of the tank [Abstract; Figs. 3-5]), the method comprising: placing said at least one follower in the rest position (CHOI teaches placing the follower (40) in a rest position [Fig. 7; 0055-0057]), passing the stop system through the opening (CHOI teaches the stop system (31) goes through the opening [0054]), bringing the tool for heating by direct contact into direct contact with an outer surface of the wall of the tank that is contiguous with the opening, and placing said at least one follower in the working position so as to clamp the wall between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower (CHOI teaches the follower (40) is attaching the component to the wall [0058]).
CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN and WEBER do not explicitly teach welding on the outer surface of the wall of the tank. In the same field of endeavor, welding, BAEK teaches a heat tool (50) directly in contact with the outer surface of the tank (2a) that is contiguous with the opening [Fig. 4; 0052]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN and WEBER, by having the heat tool contact the outer wall of the tank, as suggested by BAEK, in order to fuse a component (1) to the surface of the tank as well as inside the tank [0056-0057].
Furthermore, the recitation in the claims “so that the wall is clamped between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower” is merely an intended use. Applicants attention is drawn to MPEP 2111.02 which states that intended use statements must be evaluated to determine whether the intended use results in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art. Only if such structural difference exists, does the recitation serve to limit the claim. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. It is the examiner's position that the intended use recited in the present claims does not result in a structural difference between the presently claimed invention and the prior art and further that the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use. Given that CHOI, DEARMAN and BAEK discloses a rotatable follower and tool as presently claimed, it is clear that the rotatable follower and tool of CHOI, DEARMAN and BAEK would be capable of performing the intended use, i.e. “so that the wall is clamped between the tool for heating by direct contact and the planar surface of the rotatable follower”, presently claimed as required in the above cited portion of the MPEP, and thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have arrived at the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 11, BAEK further teaches: wherein the bringing the tool for heating by direct contact into direct contact with an outer surface of the wall of the tank that is contiguous with the opening is carried out before the placing said at least one follower in the working position (BAEK further teaches the heating tool (40, 50) is in direct contact with the opening of the outer surface of the tank (2a) and is carried out before placing the follower (10) in the working position [Figs. 4-7; 0053-0058]).
Regarding claim 12, CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN, WEBER and BAEK teach: A method for heating a wall of a motor vehicle tank by direct contact using a tool for heating by direct contact (CHOI: [Abstract]), the method comprising: performing the engagement method according to claim 10 (CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN, WEBER and BAEK teach the engagement method as taught above of claim 10), and heating the outer surface of the wall of the tank that is contiguous with the opening by direct contact using the tool for heating by direct contact (BAEK teaches contacting the outer surface of the wall of the tank (2a) with the heat tool by direct contact [0052; Fig. 4]).
Regarding claim 13, CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN, WEBER and BAEK teach: A method for plastic welding of a component to an opening in a wall of a motor vehicle tank (CHOI: [Abstract]), the method comprising: heating a wall of a motor vehicle tank by performing the method of claim 12 (CHOI, TRUDE, DEARMAN, and WEBER and BAEK teach the heating wall method of claim 12 as taught above), and performing the successive steps, placing said at least one follower in the rest position (CHOI teaches the follower (40) is a rest [0055-0057]. BAEK also teaches the follower (40) at rest [Fig. 4]), withdrawing the stop system from the opening (CHOI teaches withdrawing the stop system (31) [Fig. 8]. BAEK also teaches withdrawing the stop system (10) [Fig. 5]), disengaging the tool for heating by direct contact from the opening (CHOI teaches disengaging the heating tool (50) [0059]. BAEK also teaches disengaging the heating tool form the opening [Fig. 6]), and welding a component to the opening (CHOI teaches the follower (40) is attaching the component to the wall [0058]. BAEK also teaches welding the component to the opening [Figs. 7-8]). Furthermore, in general, the transposition of process steps or the splitting of one step into two, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to be not patentably distinguish the processes. See Ex parte Rubin, 128 USPQ 440 (Bd. Pat. App. 1959).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAROLINE BEHA whose telephone number is (571)272-2529. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY - FRIDAY 9:00 A.M. - 5:00 P.M.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ABBAS RASHID can be reached on (571) 270-7457. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.B./Examiner, Art Unit 1748
/Abbas Rashid/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights